Black to play. It's not a tactical shot, but a strategic decision.

click for larger view

I played this imbalanced position before (in terms of pawns on each flank), which results from the Scotch game. This is a crucial point in the game. I realize that I need to mobilize my queenside pawn majority, because white is going to place a superknight on d3 and his kingside pawn majority can be mobilized quickly. I have problems: My knight looks ideally placed, but it needs to move to allow ...c5. My kingside pawns will probably be harassed. I concluded, correctly, that I had to harass whites's queenside pawns or I'll get stuck in a passive situation, defending my kingside pawns. But how?

If 22...Qb5 23.Nd3 (which is where that knight wants to be anyway) and there's nothing.

If 22...Qa5 23.Nd3 Qd2 24.Qxg7 Qxc2 25.Qxh7 defends the knight, which is ideally placed, and I will lose the pawn race.

Another option is 22...g5, but in previous games I learned to be cautious about advancing the pawns on the side where I am in the minority. (The computer gives +0.39, but again the computer plays both sides flawlessly, but after the very committal g5, the pressure is on me to get my moves right.)

I played 22...Qe5, which looks normal, and then 23.Nd3 Qe7 (best move). The computer says +0.81, but that's a deceiving computer evaluation. Black's position is more difficult to play than white's, and I am fully on the defensive. (I managed to draw. My opponent rushed to exchange queens, which was not a good decision, since his queen was much better than mine.)

The computer's suggestion as best move leads to +0.15, which is the best black can get, BUT it gives black a more dynamic position instead of a passive one like what I chose. And it achieves the queenside pawn mobilization that I need.

Do you see it?

It's 22...Qa2!

So hard to see! The most reasonable continuation is 23.Qxg7 Qxb2 24.Qxh7 Qxa3 and now black has an a-passer. The computer gives more or less equal chances.

In other lines, black ends up without any passer any time soon, and is forced into a defensive endgame.

<OCF> Hang in there! My wife just went through her fourth as well. I got it only once, but my one time was worse than her four times combined. Had I not taken Paxlovid right away, I would have ended up in hospital.

I've been thinking about mortality a lot, lately, after my father-in-law passed away in July. I also lost one of my closest friends from my coming-of-age years (one of those friends for life, 3 days younger than me) and a cousin recently.

My father-in-law, who survived for over 10 years after a diagnosis of leukemia, said toward the end that he wanted to die having a sense of readiness. I think he did reach that point. It feels like a blessing.

My management of MS is working fine. My loss of strength on some muscles in my right leg (and foot) is apparently permanent, so I limp and walk slow and a bit wobbly, often with the aid of a cane. On the other hand, I do strength workouts and swim regularly, so I am quite fit, weak leg notwithstanding.

You know how it is. Having a chronic condition, or even simple aging, comes with an undercurrent of grief for what you have lost. Sometimes that bubbles to the surface, and that's when we need support and remember to be grateful for all our blessings.

I got one of those bouts of sudden sadness earlier this week. So I wrote to two friends who I have not seen in years, who never saw me walk "funny," asking them to remind me of good times when I could walk normally. They responded so warmly, it was moving.

White to play, mate in 5

click for larger view

The event we are talking about is this:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/spor...

I think that article summarizes the significance of it correctly.

White to play

click for larger view

Thanks for a breathe of fresh air amidst the swamp vapours of Rogoff. Nice puzzle. Only spotted it because I knew there was a solution and all moves are forced. Wednesday-Thursday level (starting on Friday I generally fail).